Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

The New York Times is known around our office as Holocaust Weekly News. Just about every seven days (or thereabouts) the “venerable" Zionist “newspaper of record” resurrects some angle on the persecution of Judaic persons 70 or more years ago in WWII, in what is known in Orwellian Newspeak as the "Holocaust.” Recent holocausts of Palestinians by the Israelis, or slightly older holocausts such as Ariel Sharon’s terror bombing of the city of Beirut in August 1982, are consigned by the Times to the dust of the Orwellian memory hole (one can’t write of Zionist propaganda sins of omission and commission without invoking some aspect of George Orwell’s dystopian prophecies).

Holocaust Weekly News reserves a corner of the paper for solemn homilies concerning the crimes of Nazism and the horrid possibility of its resurgence among “Right wing extremists.” Every vestige of the least Nazi sympathies are ferreted out, analyzed and then condemned with a string of self-righteous pomposity. The spiritual heirs of those who dispossess the Palestinians wax eloquent against the dispossession of the “Jews” by the Nazis.

There is, however, a neo-Nazism about which the New York Times and the rest of the establishment media find little or nothing to vituperate: the kind of neo-Nazism from which Hollywood reaps bushels of money. One such exercise in Hollywood’s venal Nazi glorification and exploitation is “The Wild Angels," a 1967 movie produced by American International Pictures (AIP) and starring Peter Fonda. The New York Times observes that it was a “hugely popular” film.

"Hugely popular” translates as hugely profitable. Last March “The Wild Angels” was released on a blu-ray DVD. The movie is loaded with Nazi imagery and icons (dig Mr. Fonda’s groovy belt buckle and the insignia under the “13” patch on his leather jacket in the photo above). The Times acknowledges that, "Swastikas abound, beginning with the logo for the movie’s title in the opening credits, which transforms a capital T into a version of the crooked cross.”

And that’s it. No anti-Nazi comment of any kind is forthcoming from the New York Times, august keeper of the “Holocaust” flame. The Times simply writes: "Out on Blu-ray and DVD in a fine digital transfer, ‘The Wild Angels’ may not have been the first movie in which a character exclaimed “Out of sight, man!” but, released three summers before “Easy Rider,” and introducing much of the same iconography...it...made the hippie youth film possible…Exuberantly directed by AIP’s mainstay, Roger Corman, and propelled by a twangy surf-music score...”

It looks as though the Times has suspended its Nazi-hunting holocaust hysteria long enough to celebrate a highly profitable Hollywood neo-Nazi flick, terming it “exuberant’" and "expertly directed.” The Nazi doings even take place to the sounds of "twangy surf music.” Out of sight, man!

An extensive review of the BBC propaganda television series “Wolf Hall” and the history of King Henry VIII, St. Thomas More, Anne Boleyn and Thomas Cromwell and their era. This six part TV series is being nationally broadcast Sunday evenings on taxpayer-supported PBS television. Episode four features the decline and fall of More, the claim that he tortured people in his home (false) and how wounded poor Henry VIII is by the “disloyalty” of his friends (quite the laugh in view of the dozen or so loyal friends and one lawfully wedded wife who Henry himself had betrayed up to this point in his reign). The part of More is brilliantly played by Anton Lesser. Episode four can be seen free of charge until May 24 at this link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/watch-online/full-episodes/wolf-hall-episode-4/

“Wolf Hall” is based on the two “historical” novels by the Catholic-hating author Hilary Mantel. Her bigotry is no bar to her literary success. Her volumes full of lies transform two monsters (the proto-Stalinist butcher Henry VIII and the tyrant’s master of treachery, Thomas Cromwell) into a hero and an anti-hero respectively (the portrayal of Cromwell is almost completely falsified -- exactly opposite of what the documentary record reveals about him). Mantel’s books were awarded the Booker Prize, the highest of all literary awards in Britain. Mantel grants legitimacy, among the pop culture reading public and other historical illiterates, to the British crown, and that effort is worth handsome remuneration in the eyes of the Cryptocracy.

2. The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome

This is our all-consuming project: my large history has consumed nearly my every waking moment for the past two years. Progress report: the book is divided into three parts: 1. Lying, Mental Reservation and Equivocation (95% complete). 2. Judaism and the Neoplatonic/Hermetic Occult (40-45% complete). 3 Usury and the Money Power (15% complete, but this is a brief section in comparison with the other two, in view of the fact that I have already written a separate book on this subject (Usury in Christendom). Section three of the new book concerns recent historical research on the Church of Rome and the Money Power not in my original work.

If God grants me the scholarly industry and I work throughout the summer without a break (other than my two speeches in Sandpoint Idaho June 20-21), I might complete The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome by September, otherwise I fear it will be January of 2016.

We recently paid for a professional English translation of portions of a very important and obscure book written in French. We must still pay for Latin translations. I can read some Latin, but for purposes of writing history I must have legally exact, verbatim et ad litteram translations. After the book is published, if I am attacked by a critic I want it to be on the basis of a dispute over my interpretations and conclusions --which are always debatable -- and not on an error in fact or translation that could have been prevented with greater scrutiny and vigilance. Hence, with the exception of elementary Latin passages, I do not undertake translations on my own.

Our expenditures for rare books and manuscripts are through the roof. Today I needed five books, I bought two. Of the three I didn’t purchase, two are used copies in good condition at a reduced price and the third is an advanced sale on a book that I have a hunch will be sold out a few weeks after it appears. They are still relatively expensive but not as pricey as they would be if we lose the opportunity to buy these volumes (and more like them in the days and weeks ahead). Anyone who would be willing to donate toward our book-purchasing budget can do so here. Thank you.

In other news, I am not sure if video of the April 11 meeting in Lansing, Michigan will become available or not. When (if?) we receive the footage we’ll burn it to two DVDs and make it available.

I wish I could be more involved, as I usually am, in analyzing current events in this column and other venues, but at present I cannot. In the meantime, if you can help to promote and publicize the seven books I have already written and which we have difficulty advertising due to bans on our work by the Right and the Left, it would be helpful in building our audience, and the revenue from sales would be welcome.

Saturday, April 18, 2015

Along with us, our colleague who blogs under the nom de plume, “Maurice Pinay” has offered ample documentation of the anti-Catholic weirdness, perversity and occultism that travels under the moniker, “traditional Catholicism.” Or, as our north Idaho cowboy pal Caleb would say, “Traditional Catholicism ain’t.”

While one of those who Maurice targets as being among the ain’t Catholics is Bp. Richard N. Williamson, nonetheless we do not shy away from employing the following research from Williamson to demonstrate how “sedevacantist Catholicism” ain’t Catholic.

Sedevacantism, for those who don’t know the term, is a “traditional Catholic” faction that declares on its own non-existent authority, that certain “heretical” popes are not popes, and therefore are not owed the obedience due the pontiff. Sedevacantist priests and alleged bishops depose these popes by stating, “They are formal heretics, therefore they are not popes.” Luther said something like that, so here we have the bipolar manifestation of Lutheran-“traditional Catholicism.” It just gets crazier and goofier as these folks descend further down the ladder of their home-made religion which is situated somewhere between Catholicism, Protestantism and the Twilight Zone.

We don't accept that parish priests or questionably-consecrated “traditional Catholic bishops" have any power or authority whatsoever to declare — other than to their own conscience — that a pope is not a pope and can be disobeyed. The very notion smacks more of a proclamation by a backwoods assembly of the Four Square church, than by the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The actual Catholic Church has a theology that teaches that no one can depose a pope — that the pope has no peer on earth. According to Catholic theology he is sovereign. Williamson describes the complex Catholic process for removing a heretical pope. Patently, until the process Williamson outlines takes place, the pope elected by the College of Cardinals, whether Paul VI or Francis the one and only, is the pope of the Church of Rome until a Church Council removes him. Bishop Williamson makes the following report, after which we will add one further point.

Church Councils can heretical Popes untie,
For Christ to depose, lest the whole Church die.

The Dominican priests of Avrillé, France, have done us all a great favour by republishing the considerations on the vacant See of Rome written some 400 years ago by a famous thomist theologian from Spain, John of St Thomas (1589–1644). Being a faithful successor of St Thomas

Aquinas, he benefits from that higher wisdom of the Middle Ages when theologians could still measure men by God instead of having to measure God by men, a tendency which began as a necessity (if souls could no longer take medieval penicillin, they had to take a lesser medicine), but which culminated in Vatican II. Here, much abbreviated, are the main ideas of John of St Thomas on the deposition of a Pope:﻿—

I Can a Pope be deposed?

Answer, yes, because Catholics are obliged to separate themselves from heretics, after the heretics have been warned (Titus III, 10). Also, a heretical Pope puts the whole Church in a state of legitimate self-defence. But the Pope must be warned first, as officially as possible, in case he would retract. Also his heresy must be public, and declared as officially as possible, to prevent wholesale confusion among Catholics, by their being bound to follow.

II By whom must he be officially declared a heretic?

Answer, not by the Cardinals because although they may elect a Pope, they cannot depose one, because it is the Universal Church that is threatened by a heretical Pope, and so the most universal possible authority of the Church can alone depose him, namely a Church Council composed of a quorum of all the Church’s Cardinals and Bishops. These would be convoked not authoritatively (which the Pope alone can do) but among themselves.

III By what authority would a Church Council depose the Pope?

(Here is the main difficulty because Christ gives to the Pope supreme power over the entire Church, with no exception, as Vatican I defined in 1870. Already John of St Thomas gave arguments of authority, reason and Canon Law to prove this supreme power of the Pope. Then how can a Council, being beneath the Pope, yet depose him? John of St Thomas adopts the solution laid out by another famous Dominican theologian, Thomas Cajetan (1469–1534). The Church’s deposition of the Pope would fall not upon the Pope as Pope, but upon the bond between the man and his Papacy. That may seem hair-splitting, but it is logical.)

On the one hand not even a Church Council has authority over the Pope. On the other hand the Church is obliged to avoid heretics and to protect the sheep. Therefore, just as in a Conclave the Cardinals are the ministers of Christ to bind this man to the Papacy, but Christ alone gives him his papal authority, so the Church Council would be theministersof Christ to unbind this heretic from the Papacy by their solemn declaration, but Christ alone, by his divineauthorityover the Pope, would authoritatively depose him. In other words, the Church Council would be deposing the Pope not authoritatively from above, but only ministerially from below. John of St Thomas confirms this conclusion from the Church’s Canon Law, which states in several places that God alone can depose the Pope, but the Church can pass judgment on his heresy.

Alas, as the Dominicans of Avrillé point out, nearly all Cardinals and Bishops of the Church today are so largely infected with modernism that there is no human hope of a Church Council seeing clear to condemn the modernism of the Conciliar Popes. We can only pray and wait for the divine solution, which will come in God’s good time. To follow, is a Pope not automatically deposed by his mere heresy?

Additional point by Michael Hoffman: In reading St. Thomas More’s letter to England’s Lord Chancellor Thomas Cromwell, which More penned in Chelsea on March 5, 1534, we encountered this sentence: “…in the next general council it may well happen that this Pope may be deposed and another substituted in his room with whom the King’s Highness may be very well content.” (Alvaro De Silva [ed.] The Last Letters of Thomas More [Eerdman’s Publishing, 2000], p. 54).

Friday, April 17, 2015

Noam Chomsky: Yes, I think they were kind of acting in this case like spoiled adolescents, but that doesn't justify killing them. I mean, I could say the same about a great deal that appears in the press. I think it's quite irresponsible often. For example, when the press in the United Statesand England supported the worst crime of this century, the invasion of Iraq, that was way more irresponsible than what Charlie Hebdo did. It led to the destruction of Iraq and the spread of the sectarian conflict that's tearing the region to shreds. It was a really major crime. Aggression is the supreme international crime under international law. Insofar as the press supported that, that was deeply irresponsible, but I don't think the press should be shut down.Read more here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seungyoon-lee/noam-chomsky-twitter-interview_b_7064462.html

Our speech included new research not in the book on Florentine bankers and their growing control of the Renaissance papacy in 16th century Italy. We spoke for 90 minutes, after which listeners remained in their seats as some ten or twelve people lined up for a lively question-and-answer period.

Christian economist Daniel Krynicki, author of History of Money and Usury in America, was on hand to field questions on usury and inflation, and usury and hard money (gold and silver). He gave learned replies to both queries. We regret having had so little time to converse with him after having corresponded for the past two years. Daniel is the altruist researcher who provided an index to Usury in Christendom, which appears online here.

Our book table did a flourishing business, offering for sale our texts, CDs and DVDs. The entire event ran from roughly 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., after which some fifteen people and this writer repaired to a local diner for lunch and further conversation.

The meeting’s organizer, the courageous Christian activist John Mangopoulos, the father of five, subsequently videotaped two interviews with us for his Michigan “public access” cable television program. Over the years Pat Buchanan, Joseph Sobran, Otto Scott, Sam Francis and other conservative thinkers have appeared on John’s show. We are grateful to him and his family for the smooth operation of the meeting.

The highlight of the day was our conversation with a man from Grand Rapids, who informed us that as a result of hearing our talk, he had contacted a woman to whom he had loaned several thousand dollars in the past, to inform her that he was returning the $400 in interest he had charged her. Hallelujah!

We have been told that a DVD of the speech may become available in the near future. Watch this blog for details.

Judaic bigotry and hate speech against Jesus Christ manifests ceremonially in the Zionist-controlled media at Christmas and Easter, the holiest seasons for Christians. Anti-Christianic bigots at the New York Times are particularly persistent in massively publicizing pseudo-archaeological "evidence”attacking the central tenet of the Christian Faith, the Resurrection of Jesus: “…if Christ be not risen, then our preaching is vain, and your faith is also vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:14).

In 2015 the ritual hate speech is disseminated as an Eastern Sunday report on p. 4 of the New York Times, “Findings Reignite Debate on Claim of Jesus’ Bones.” It is written by Isabel Kershner,an Israeli. The 2015 Times article states, “There is the notion that burial remains, including bone matter, of Jesus of Nazareth would suggest that there could have been no bodily resurrection.”

A multi-millionaire non-Judaic movie mogul, James Cameron, is deeply implicated in promoting the heinous lie that Jesus did not resurrect from the dead. The deep pockets Hollywood director is joined in his anti-Christianic campaign by the Discovery Channel, the aforementioned NY Times, and Israeli Judaics, among them Simcha Jacobovici, Aryeh Shimron, as well as the Israeli government’s "Antiquities Authority,” which "provided some technical assistance” to Cameron and Jacobovici. Here is an excerpt from the Times article, published April 5, 2015:

JERUSALEM — ...(T)wo ancient artifacts found here have set off a fierce archaeological and theological debate in recent decades. At the heart of the quarrel is an assortment of inscriptions that led some to suggest Jesus of Nazareth was married and fathered a child, and that the Resurrection could never have happened.

Now, the earth may have yielded new secrets...A Jerusalem-based geologist believes he has established a common bond between them that strengthens the case for their authenticity and importance. The first artifact is an ossuary, or burial box for bones, bearing the Aramaic inscription “James son of Joseph brother of Jesus,” that the Israeli collector who owns it says he bought from an East Jerusalem antiquities dealer in the 1970s.

...The second artifact is a tomb unearthed at a building site in the East Talpiot neighborhood of East Jerusalem in 1980 and thrust into the limelight by a 2007 documentary movie, “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.” The film was produced by (Hollywood director) James Cameron (“Titanic”) and written by Simcha Jacobovici, an Israeli-born filmmaker based in Toronto. It was first broadcast on the Discovery Channel in 2007.

The burial chamber, which subsequently became known as the Talpiot Tomb, contained 10 ossuaries, some with inscriptions that have been interpreted as “Jesus son of Joseph,” “Mary” and other names associated with New Testament figures. The group of names led Mr. Jacobovici and his supporters to argue that this was probably the tomb of the family of Jesus of Nazareth, a sensational claim rejected by most archaeologists and experts, who said that such names were very common at that time.....Mr. Jacobovici and his supporters say that if it could be proved that the so-called James ossuary, whose provenance is unclear, originated in the Talpiot Tomb, the names on it, added to the cluster of names found in the tomb, would bolster the chances that the tomb belonged to the family of Jesus of Nazareth.

Enter the geologist, Aryeh Shimron. He is convinced he has made that connection by identifying a well-defined geochemical match between specific elements found in samples collected from the interiors of the Talpiot Tomb ossuaries and of the James ossuary. When the Talpiot ossuaries were discovered, they were covered by a thick layer of a type of soil, Rendzina, that is characteristic of the hills of East Jerusalem and was apt to impose a unique geochemical signature on the ossuaries buried beneath it. ...An unlikely Indiana Jones, Dr. Shimron, 79, was born in the former Czechoslovakia and is an expert in plaster. Now retired as a senior researcher of the Geological Survey of Israel, a government institute specializing in earth sciences, he has been involved in archaeological geology for the last 20 years. Dr. Shimron based his research on the theory that an earthquake that convulsed Jerusalem in A.D. 363 flooded the Talpiot Tomb with tons of soil and mud, dislodging its entrance stone and, unusually, covering the chalk ossuaries entirely.

“The soil created a kind of vacuum,” he said. “The composition of the tomb was simply frozen in time.” For the last seven years, Dr. Shimron has been studying the chemistry of samples from chalk crust scraped from the underside of the Talpiot ossuaries and, more recently, from the James ossuary. He has also studied samples of soil and rubble from inside the ossuaries. In addition, for comparative purposes he has examined samples from ossuaries from about 15 other tombs. Mr. Jacobovici, who has been documenting the research for another movie, said “the production” financed the lab work.

The Israel Antiquities Authority provided access to most of the ossuaries and carried out the major part of the sampling under the direction of Dr. Shimron. A spokeswoman for the authority said that it had provided some technical assistance for Mr. Jacobovici’s movie… Today the Talpiot Tomb is sealed underground beneath a concrete slab in a courtyard between nondescript apartment buildings on East Talpiot’s Dov Gruner Street, and its ossuaries are under the custodianship of the Israel Antiquities Authority. The James ossuary is back with its owner, Oded Golan, the collector, who lives in Tel Aviv and keeps the box in a secret location. Yet Dr. Shimron’s findings seem likely to reawaken the controversies of the past.

There is the notion that burial remains, including bone matter, of Jesus of Nazareth would suggest that there could have been no bodily resurrection. Moreover, speculation that one of the bone boxes found in Talpiot may have belonged to Mary Magdalene, while another bore the inscription “Judah son of Jesus,” has only added to the general contentiousness of the finds. ...Shimon Gibson was among the Antiquities Authority archaeologists who entered the newly exposed Talpiot Tomb in 1980. He said recently that it was clear that the underground entrance to the tomb had been open since antiquity and that the tomb had filled with soil abruptly as a result of a single quick event — possibly an earthquake. Dr. Gibson and other archaeologists concluded that tomb raiders had probably been there during the Byzantine period. But he discounted any possibility that the James ossuary had been spirited away when the tomb was uncovered. ...Dr. Gibson said, the scholarly community was eagerly awaiting the publication of Dr. Shimron’s results in a scientific journal for peer review….